1. JOB EVALUT I ON PROCESS AND
SYST EM - A COMPARAT I V E ST UDY
By
Adam Shafi Shaik PhD.
s h a f i a d a m @ g m a i l . c o m

2. Introduction
What is Job Evaluation?
Job evaluation is the process of systematically
determining the value or relative worth of jobs in an
organization
Key Purpose
• Systematic comparison between jobs
to assess their relative worth for the
purpose of establishing a rational
pay/reward structure.
• Create platform of internal equity to
assist and improve business
performance & Profitability
• Achieve and maintain an equitable
distribution of wages and/or salaries
according to level of position.
• Determine hierarchical levels within
the Group/Organization.
.
Key Benefits
• Objective method of grading and
ranking jobs
• Fits the jobs in existing structure
• Allow employees to gain a sense of
confidence how they can progress in
the organization
• Reduction inequalities & minimize
differentials. in salary structure.
• Equip management with an
appropriate tool to assist with
decisions related to Salary & Benefit
entitlement
• Standardization redesign jobs,
distribute easy & difficult jobs
equally
A d a m S h a f i S h a i k P h D .

3. Job evaluation Process
•Describe & analyses the Job and Job family matrix
•Preparation of Job analysis & job description
•Identify Skill, responsibility, Competencies factors
Job analysis &
Description
•Weighting job values
•Job evaluation and organization structure
•Grade the jobs as per relative worth
Job Grading & Structure
•Development of salary/benefits & incentive or pay
structure
•Match with company policy, market rates, ability to pay
•Assign pay rates to the job grades
Built a remuneration
system
•Management and staff to be empowered /educated
•Implementation of Job evaluation
•Update and match with each job on HR System
Implementation
& communication
A d a m S h a f i S h a i k P h D .

4. Job evaluation approach
Select Job
evaluation
method
Create Job
evaluation panel
Train members
to evaluate
Document plan
of action &
evaluate jobs
Communicate
with employees
Set up appeals
process
Typical Job
evolution
approach
A d a m S h a f i S h a i k P h D .

5. Application for the Job evaluation
Job Evaluation
Reward
Internal Equity
& Link to
market data
Succession
Planning
Understand
relationships
between
roles
Organisational
Analysis
Identifying
‘gaps’ in the
structure
Career
Development
budget
Understanding
possible career
paths
Grading
Underpin the
framework
A d a m S h a f i S h a i k P h D .

6. Job evaluation Methods
Method Name
Ranking or Job
Comparison
Factors
Job is judged in terms of duties, responsibilities
and demands on the job holder. The jobs are
ranked according to “the whole job” rather than a
number of compensable factors.
Characteristics
A summary method based on
ranking job from the hardest
to the easiest ones
Grading/classification
Method
Factor Comparison
Method
Analytical point
Rating System
Grouping job posts into
homogenous classes
(categories); the jobs are then
compared to a model.
A job grade is defined as a group of different jobs
of similar difficulty or requiring similar skills to
perform them. Job grades are determined on the
basis of information derived from job analysis.
Method based on determining
the right hierarchy of job posts
regardless of level of job
difficulty.
Factors common to all jobs are identified,
selected and defined precisely. i.e
Psychological, physical requirements, skill
requirements, working conditions and
responsibility.
Jobs are broke down based on various identifiable
factors such as skill, effort, training, knowledge,
hazards, responsibility, etc. Thereafter, points are
allocated to each of these factors.
Methods based on
determining the level of job
difficulty and comparing them
to the scale; a given number of
points is attributed to each
criterion
A d a m S h a f i S h a i k P h D .

7. Job evaluation prominent Methods
DescriptorsJE Method
The input-throughput-output model is reflected in the Hay Method
as Know-How ,Problem Solving and AccountabilityHay Group.
Peromnes compared by grade with other jobs both inside and
outside the organization, The first six evaluate 4 from job content)
and t last two evaluate education and training and experiencePEROMNES
The JE Manager process empowers employees for own evaluations
together with their line managers, Measures six factors each on a bi-
dimensional basis (X & Y)JE MANAGER/DT.
The T.A.S.K. job evaluation system evaluates jobs from grade 1 up to
grade 26, where grade 1 will be the lowest job and grade 26 the
highest job, through evaluation of established skills
T.A.S.K.(TunedAssessmentof
SkillsandKnowledge)
The system allocates a point score and a Paterson grade to the job,
which can be correlated to any other grading system through sizing
of positions by using 7 factorsRE measure
Paterson defines job evaluation based on level of Decision Banding,
Majorly classified in 6 kind of decision banding (A,B,C,D,E,F) and sub
bands based on level of decision makingPaterson Framework
Castellion is a point system which evaluates jobs on the basis of six
factors namely: decision, pressure of work, controls and checks,
consequences of error, education and experience.)
Castellion system
A d a m S h a f i S h a i k P h D .

8. Job evaluation systems comparison
A d a m S h a f i S h a i k P h D .

9. PATERSON FRAMEWORK
• The basic premise of the method is that all jobs, regardless of level, industry or country,
can be compared in terms of the number and weight of decisions that must be made by
the job incumbent., From this comparison a pay structure can be established.
• Paterson maintains that an organization’s pay structure should reflect the organization and
responsibility levels within the organization, and that responsibility should be measured
and compared in terms of a single factor common to all jobs, namely, decision-making.
• Paterson defines six kinds of Bands of decision, which are found in any company. Any job
can be defined in terms of these Bands of decision and the authority relationships, which
are involved.
• BAND F: Policy Making Decisions (Top Management)
• BAND E: Programming Decisions (Senior Management)
• BAND D: Interpretive Decisions (Middle Management and High Level Specialists)
• BAND C: Routine/Process/System Decisions (Specialist or Skilled Employees)
• BAND B:Automatic/Operative/Sub-system (Partial skilled employees)
• BAND A: Defined Decisions (Basic Skilled Employees
BandsofdecisionPatersongradingsystem
A d a m S h a f i S h a i k P h D .

10. F
E
D
C
B
A
Strategic Corporate Direction (SBG)
Executive Management / General Management
Strategic Execution / Long Term Planning
Functional Management / Management:
Interpretive / Tactical Management
Advanced Operational /
Professional: Routine /Process
/ Systems
Operational (Execution): Automatic /
Operative / Sub System
Basic Skills: Defined /
Primary Skills
A d a m S h a f i S h a i k P h D .

11. P A T E R S O N F R A M E W O R K : T Y P I C A L B A N D , S U B B A N D & G R A D E M A T R I X
Band
Broadba
nd
Grade Grade Description Band Description Benchmark Jobs
E
EU
E5
EXECUTIVE MNGT
Translation of
corporate direction
into organization
planning &
management
CEO
E4 COO, CFO
EL
E3
Operations Director
(multiple operations)
E2 Operations Director
E1 Project Director
D
DU
D5
Leading a medium sized
project or a zone in Mega
Project or a department in
Head office with extended
level of experience
Translation of
organization plans
into functional plans
and best practice
systems
Senior Project
Manager/Engineering
Manager (E&M/C&A)
D4
Leading a medium sized
project or a zone in Mega
Project or a department in
Head office
Engineering Manager,
Project Manager/Zone
Manager (Mega Project)
DL
D3
Leading an execution in
project or multiple
sections in head office
With extended experience
Senior Construction
Manager /
Technical/Design Manager
D2
Leading an execution in
project or multiple
sections in head office
Construction Manager
(M&E/C&A) /
Technical/Design Manager
D1 leading a larger section
Section Manager/
Technical/Design Manager
A d a m S h a f i S h a i k P h D .

12. Band Broadband Grade Grade Description Band Description Benchmark Jobs
C CU
C5 Heading an entire unit called section
Optimizing a given system to
achieve plans
Section Head / Technical Section
Head / Materials Section Head
C4
Sr. Professional supervising
professionals
Senior Site Engineer / Snr Technical
Engineer / Snr Materials Engineer
C CL
C2
Full-fledged experience professional
with Bachelor degree
Solving a range of technical
problems within a recognized
technical discipline through
appropriate use of tools or
application of theory.
Full-fledged Professional (Site
Engineer/ Technical Engineer /
Material Engineer / Design
Draughtsman / Site Supervisors
C1
Entry level professional with Bachelor
Degree
Entry Level (Site Engineer/ Technical
Engineer / Material Engineer / Design
Draughtsman / Site Supervisors )
B
BU
B5
Experienced Foreman, Coordinator,
Administrator Ability to manage a group of
workers applying industry
specific tools and equipment’s
Experienced Foreman / Draughtsman
B4
Entry Level Foreman, Coordinator,
Administrator or their equivalent
Entry level Foreman / Draughtsman
BL
B3 Skills to handhold a group of workers
Routine application of industry
specific tools and equipment
which require training but not
discipline apprenticeship
Charge Hand, Assistant Foreman,
Highly skilled Certified Technicians,
CAD operators and their equivalent
B2
Knowledge of application of Complex
tools
Certified Tradesman, Heavy vehicle
Drivers, Heavy Equipment Operators,
Mid-Level Mechanics
B1 Master Skills or Multiple Skills
Master Tradesman (Central A/C
Technician, Certified Welder, Master
Electrician, Master Plumber) , Light
Vehicle Driver
A A
A3 BASIC SKILLS
Routine Task orientation using
simple tools and equipment.
Trade man (A/C Technician, Ductman,
Insulator, General Welder, Electrician,
Plumber Mason / Steel fixer
A2 Semi-Skilled
Routine Task orientation using
simple tools and equipment.
Semi Tradesman (Carpenters, Steel
fixer, plumbers, electricians and their
equivalent)
A1 Unskilled
Manual worker using physical
strength
Helpers, Labors, Cleaners
P A T E R S O N F R A M E W O R K : T Y P I C A L B A N D , S U B B A N D & G R A D E M A T R I X
A d a m S h a f i S h a i k P h D .

13. P A T E R S O N F R A M E W O R K : D U A L C A R E E R A P P R A C H
Band Line and Specialisation Description
F
Corporate strategic decision and policy
Approval
E Upper
Translation of corporate direction into
organization planning and Management.
E Lower
Translation of Divisional direction into
Organization planning and Management
D Upper
Translation of organizational plans into
functional plans and best practice systems.
D Lower
Implementation and execution of
functional plans
C Upper Optimizing a given system to achieve plans.
C Lower
Solving a range of technical problems
within the recognized technical discipline
through appropriate use of tools
B Upper
Supervise routine application of industry
specific tools and equipments which
require training but not discipline
apprenticeship.
B Lower
Routine application of industry specific
tools and equipments which require
training but not discipline apprenticeship.
A
Routine task orientation using simple tools
and equipments
SBG-Group Level Corporate Top Management
Divisional Head (CEO) CXO Positions
Executive Management Group / Functional / Advisor
Management Top Professionals Specialists
Middle Management Functional Specialists
First Line Supervisors SMEs / Practitioners
Advanced operational
Operational Skills
Technical Skills
Primary Skills
A d a m S h a f i S h a i k P h D .

14. • Depth and Range
of Knowledge
• Planning and
organising
• Communicating
and Influencing
JOB SIZE
Hay method of Job evaluation
Compensable factors
ACCOUNTABILITYPROBLEM SOLVINGKNOW HOW
• Thinking
environment
• Thinking
challenge
• Freedom to act
• Nature of impact
• Area of impact
(magnitude)
The purpose of the Hay System is to provide a consistent procedure to evaluate position
classifications by Objectively measuring the content of each job compared to other jobs
based on classification factors applied to all jobs;, Determining its relative worth;
Establishing equitable pay relationships among all jobs.
A d a m S h a f i S h a i k P h D .

15. A d a m S h a f i S h a i k P h D .

16. Hay method -Know-How Slotting
( I l l u s t r a t i v e )
A d a m S h a f i S h a i k P h D .

17. Castellion system of Job evaluation
Castellion is a point system which evaluates jobs on the basis of six factors
namely
• Decision-making: the exercise of making a choice between alternative courses
of action.
• Pressure of Work: the volume of work and the pressure under which decisions
have to be made.
• Controls and Checks: both direct and indirect controls applied to the activities
of the incumbent.
• Consequence of Error: possibility of losses which may result from wrong
decisions or lack of vigilance.
• Education: level of education required to perform the duties of the job.
• Experience: the maximum period needed for a person with the required
education to perform the duties of the job.
FactorsofJESystem
• Grade 1-top executive.
• Grade 2-4-executive
• Grade 3-8- senior
• Grade 12-9- standard
• Grade 16-13- laboures
The Castellion grading system has 16
grades, grade 16 is for simple decisions, 15
for pragmatic (practical things) decisions,
and 14 to 9 is for tactical decisions, 8 to 5
coordination interpretative decisions, and
4 to 1 for strategic decisions.
A d a m S h a f i S h a i k P h D .

18. Hay and Paterson Strength and weakness
*The method is used world wide, Recognized by ILO
*Flexible and easily tailored to suit the organization
*Extensively used within the Construction,
Manufacturing & Service Industry
*Depend only on decision band
*Lower level jobs many not be weighted logically
*Create complexity in pay decisions
*Measures jobs by assessing three distinct factors
*Most widely used method in the world
*An analytical method evaluates jobs and not people
*Provides a rating of differences, not just ranking
*Means to assess pay across different
market/functions
*Complicated Matrix to be scored
*Accent on Management’s Know How
*Reflect hierarchy and budget, doesn’t support few roles
*Instant evaluation system – not looking for development
PatersonJEsystemHayGroupJESystem
A d a m S h a f i S h a i k P h D .

19. A cross-referencing for various job
evaluations systems
A cross-comparison of grades between different job evaluation methods is shown in
the sample comparative table below. It also describes the differences between
various grades on a semantic level.
Paterson
Grading
Hay Units
range Peromnes
Semantic scale
D1 401-465 8 Professionally qualified and
experienced specialists,
management, interpretive or
Probabilistic Decisions
D2 466-540 7
D3 541-629 6
D i f f e r e n t j o b g r a d i n g s y s t e m s i n u s e .
JE Method %
Paterson 34%
Peromnes 12%
Hay 20%
JE Manager 5%
In-house 20%
NA 9%
Total 100%
Source: PWC Remuneration trends report -2010
Job Evaluation
System
TOP Executive
(%)
Staff Levels
(%)
Hay 10 9
Customized
Systems 25 22
Paterson 35 38
Peromnes 3 6
TASK 2 5
JE Manager 10 11
Source: P.E. Corporate Services, Sept 2008 General Staff Salary Survey
A d a m S h a f i S h a i k P h D .

20. THANK YOU
Adam Shafi Shaik PhD.
shafiadam@gmail.com